The usability imperative for securing digital asset devices
For CIOs and security leaders, the key management issue is not whether a digital-asset device is technically secure, but who owns the trade-off when security, recovery and usability collide. In practice, that means defining decision rights early: product, security, risk and operations cannot each optimize their own criteria in isolation. If the recovery journey is too complex, users will invent unsafe workarounds; if it is too permissive, the organisation may create a single point of compromise. The governance question is how much friction the business is willing to accept in exchange for reduced loss exposure.
The article also points to a broader portfolio lesson. Security-by-design is not a late-stage control, it is a cost and schedule choice that should be funded like any other core product requirement. That has implications for vendor selection, internal assurance and auditability. Leaders should ask whether a device or platform comes with independent testing, explicit recovery controls, tamper-resistant logging and a support model that matches the organisationโs tolerance for operational failure. If those capabilities are bolted on after launch, technical debt becomes a security liability.
For enterprise adoption, the practical test is whether the operating model can handle human error as a normal condition. Multisig, hardware-backed keys and recovery processes only work if roles, thresholds and exception handling are clear to business owners, not just engineers. Next questions for executives: who can approve recovery, what evidence is required, how are compromised or lost devices revoked, and what happens when a key stakeholder is unavailable? The best design is the one the organisation can actually govern under stress.
The three components of security
Strong security models for devices like signers, which are used to secure blockchain transactions,ย require three major components. First, a secure operating system. Second, a secure element to bind the software to the hardware. And third, a secure user interface. Each of which need to be frequently tested by researchers and white hat hackers to simulate real-world attacks and improve product resilience and usability. The first two elements focus on securing the device software and hardware. Secure software has always been a problem, but one that has improved over the last decade, as security architectures and processes have been refined. Meanwhile, hardware security components have become widely availableโfrom trusted platform modules on computers to secure enclaves in smartphonesโallowing digital information to essentially be locked to a device. For crypto signers, hardware must provide encryption capabilities. And the security of the software must be frequently tested. Ledger, for example, has a secure OS and a Secure Element that handles encryption primitives, and a secure display that prevents device takeover.Security and usability working hand in hand
Asset recovery is a major consideration when designing signers. If recovery options are not easy to use, an owner could lose access. But if recovery processes are not secure enough, attackers could exploit the system. With SIM swapping attacks, for example, attackers can tap into a mobile communications channel used for account recovery and โrecoverโ a victimโs password to steal their assets. In the digital-asset ecosystem, the creation of the seed phrase, a sequence of 12 to 24 words that could act as a passphrase for wallets is an example of improving usability and security. Known more formally as Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 39 (BIP-39), the approach gives users a master password to unlock their hierarchical deterministic (HD) wallets. There is a lot of creative tension between the security team and the UX team that happens to achieve the proper balance between convenience and safety, Fadell says, referring to Ledgerโs security research team, the Donjon. โWe mock things up, we prototype things from a UX UI perspective, we walk through it, then we walk the Donjon team through it,โ Fadell explains. โWe push back and forth to find the absolute optimal solution to balance the two.โ Through the research the Donjon team has conducted, Ledger designed its Recovery Keyโan NFC-based physical card to back up your 24 wordsโto be both user-friendly and secure. โWhat we did, as a first in the industry, was include an NFC card,โ says Fadell. โInstead of only writing it down, you can also have an NFC card called a Recovery Key. You can have multiple Recovery Keys and store them in a lockbox, a safety deposit box, or give them to someone you trust for safekeeping.โ A number of government initiatives are working to regulate this balance between security and usability. This includes the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agencyโs Secure by Design, which aims to build cybersecurity into the design and manufacture of technology products. And the UKโs National Cyber Security Centreโs Software Security Code of Practice, which outlines security principles expected of all organizations that develop or sell software.Enterprise security presents distinct challenges
Embedding usability and security into devices for companies adds further complexity as businesses need features such as multi-signature capabilities to protect against single points of failure, whether from external attacks or internal bad actors. Security design can take these requirements into account, with secure governance using multiple signatures (multisig), hardware security modules (HSMs) for key storage, trusted display systems, and other usable security capabilities. These technologies are critically important for companies who have roles in the blockchain ecosystem. Failure to establish robust security measures can have dire consequences. In 2024, for example, unknown cybercriminals made off with more than $300 million worth of assets from DMM Bitcoin, leading the Japanese cryptocurrency platform to close six months later. Japanโs Financial Services Agency discovered severe risk management issues, including inadequate oversight, lack of independent audits, and poor security practices. For companies, allowing a multi-stage process that involves a required number of stakeholders is critical, says Fadell. โItโs making sure that the attack vector is not just one person, and so you need to support multiple people with multiple factors on all of their devices as well,โ he says. โIt gets to be a real combinatoric problem.โR&D to stay one step aheadย
To keep up with requirements and offer strong security with improved visibility, crypto firms need to invest in research and development, Fadell says. Attack labs, such as Ledger Donjon, can conduct real-world testing on specific enterprise security requirements and create scenarios to educate both management and workers of the potential threats. Such research and development can support device designers and engineers in their never-ending mission to balance security measures with usability so that digital asset devices can support users to safeguard their digital assets in a constantly evolving crypto and cyber landscape. Learn more about how to secure digital assets in theย Ledger Academy. This content was produced by Insights, the custom content arm of MIT Technology Review. It was not written by MIT Technology Reviewโs editorial staff. This content was researched, designed, and written by human writers, editors, analysts, and illustrators. This includes the writing of surveys and collection of data for surveys. AI tools that may have been used were limited to secondary production processes that passed thorough human review.Enjoyed this article? Sign up for our newsletter to receive regular insights and stay connected.
